Development of an Integrated Surface and Subsurface Model of Everglades National Park Amy Cook Florida International University, [email protected]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 3-28-2012 Development of an Integrated Surface and Subsurface Model of Everglades National Park Amy Cook Florida International University, [email protected] DOI: 10.25148/etd.FI12050240 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Cook, Amy, "Development of an Integrated Surface and Subsurface Model of Everglades National Park" (2012). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 634. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/634 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE MODEL OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING by Amy M. Cook 2012 To: Dean Amir Mirmiran College of Engineering and Computing This thesis, written by Amy M. Cook, and entitled DEVELOPMENT OF AN IN- TEGRATED SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE MODEL OF EVERGLADES NA- TIONAL PARK, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgment. We have read this thesis and recommend that it be approved. Georgio Tachiev Walter Z. Tang Hector R. Fuentes, Major Professor Date of Defense: March 28, 2012 The thesis of Amy M. Cook is approved. Dean Amir Mirmiran College of Engineering and Computing Dean Lakshmi N. Reddi University Graduate School Florida International University, 2012 ii c Copyright 2012 by Amy M. Cook All rights reserved. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank the Department of Interior for funding the development of this hydrological model, with a special thanks to Robert Fennema and Kiren Bahm from National Park Services for providing data and contributing their time, ideas, and intimate knowledge of the Everglades National Park. It was an honor to work with them. My sincerest gratitude goes to Dr. Georgio I. Tachiev with the Applied Research Center for his guidance, training, motivation, and support throughout the model development. The opportunity to work with him has provided me with invaluable experience and skills that will stay with me throughout my professional career. My gratitude also goes to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Florida International University, specifically Dr. Hector R. Fuentes and Dr. Walter Z. Tang, for their guidance in completing this thesis. Lastly, I would like to thank my family for their unwavering encouragement and support in both my professional and personal endeavors. iv ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE MODEL OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK by Amy M. Cook Florida International University, 2012 Miami, Florida Professor Hector R. Fuentes, Major Professor An integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model of Everglades National Park (ENP) was developed using MIKE SHE and MIKE 11 modeling software. The model has a resolution of 400 meters, covers approximately 1050 square miles of ENP, includes 110 miles of drainage canals with a variety of hydraulic structures, and processes hydrological information, such as evapotranspiration, precipitation, groundwater levels, canal discharges and levels, and operational schedules. Cal- ibration was based on time series and probability of exceedance for water levels and discharges in the years 1987 through 1997. Model verification was then com- pleted for the period of 1998 through 2005. Parameter sensitivity in uncertainty analysis showed that the model was most sensitive to the hydraulic conductivity of the regional Surficial Aquifer System, the Manning's roughness coefficient, and the leakage coefficient, which defines the canal-subsurface interaction. The model offers an enhanced predictive capability, compared to other models currently available, to simulate the flow regime in ENP and to forecast the impact of topography, water flows, and modifying operation schedules. v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION . 1 2. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AREA . 3 2.1 Hydrogeology . 3 2.2 Soil . 10 2.3 Vegetation . 13 3. RESEARCH JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES . 14 3.1 Other Models of the Study Area . 15 4. METHODOLOGY . 18 4.1 Model Domain and Discretization . 18 4.2 MIKE 11 . 20 4.2.1 MIKE 11 geometry . 20 4.2.2 Boundary conditions . 21 4.2.3 Control structures . 23 4.2.4 Detention areas . 26 4.3 MIKE SHE . 30 4.3.1 Soil . 31 4.3.2 Vegetation . 35 4.3.3 Rainfall . 36 4.3.4 Evapotranspiration . 37 4.3.5 Overland flow . 38 4.3.6 Hydrogeology . 40 4.3.7 Boundary conditions . 53 4.4 Model Calibration (1987-1997) and Validation (1998-2005) . 55 4.4.1 Manning's number . 58 4.4.2 Conductivity of the Surficial Aquifer System . 58 4.4.3 Leakage factor . 58 4.5 Assumptions and Limitations . 58 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . 60 5.1 Exploratory Data Analysis . 61 5.2 Statistical Parameters . 63 5.3 Probability of Exceedance . 65 5.4 Water Balance . 69 5.5 Sensitivity Analysis . 71 5.6 Comparison with Other Models . 74 5.6.1 Western Marl Prairie . 75 5.6.2 Shark Slough . 75 vi 5.6.3 Rocky Glades . 76 5.6.4 Taylor Slough Basin . 77 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 79 REFERENCES . 82 vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 2.1 Approximate range of hydraulic conductivities . 9 4.1 Prescribed discharge for L-29 culverts . 22 4.2 Structures used for boundary condition input . 24 4.3 Structures used for boundary condition output . 25 4.4 Structures implemented with operational rules . 25 4.5 Structures implemented in MIKE 11 as underflow . 25 4.6 Hydraulic parameters of soils in the unsaturated zone . 33 4.7 Vegetation parameters used for calibration . 35 4.8 List of hydrogeologic parameters . 42 5.1 Statistical parameters for stations in the vicinity of G3273 . 64 5.2 Exceedance probability for stations in the vicinity of NE1 . 67 5.3 Comparison of water storage data . 71 viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 2.1 Location of study area . 4 2.2 Generalized hydrogeologic framework of aquifer systems . 6 2.3 Surficial aquifer system across central Miami-Dade County . 7 2.4 Conceptual hyrogeologic conditions of the Biscayne Aquifer . 8 2.5 STATSGO soil coverage . 11 2.6 Miami-Dade County FL soil map . 12 2.7 FLGAP vegetation coverage . 13 4.1 Model Domain . 19 4.2 MIKE 11 boundary conditions . 23 4.3 Implementation of canals at the domain boundary . 24 4.4 Configuration of detention areas . 27 4.5 Cross sections defining the S357 and C-111 Northern Detention Area . 28 4.6 MIKE SHE and MIKE 11 exchange . 31 4.7 Soil coverage of the study area . 32 4.8 Moisture retention curves . 33 4.9 Soil classifications implemented in the model . 34 4.10 Vegetation coverage in the model . 36 4.11 Location of USGS wells used to determine hydrogeologic parameters . 41 4.12 Bottom level of layer 1{Miami Oolite . 43 4.13 Thickness of layer 1{Miami Oolite . 44 4.14 Horizontal Conductivity of layer 1{Miami Oolite . 45 4.15 Bottom level of layer 2{Surficial Aquifer System . 46 4.16 Thickness of layer 1–Surficial Aquifer System . 47 4.17 Horizontal Conductivity of layer 2–Surficial Aquifer System . 48 ix 4.18 Location of pump tests used to generate transmissivity of the Surficial Aquifer System . 49 4.19 Transmissivity of layer 1{Miami Oolite . 50 4.20 Interpolated transmissivity data for Layer 2–Surficial Aquifer System . 51 4.21 Geological lens representing layer Q5 . 52 4.22 Prescribed subsurface boundary conditions . 54 4.23 Flow chart of model calibration . 56 5.1 Example of stage time series . 61 5.2 Example of discharge time series . 62 5.3 Example of accumulated discharge . 62 5.4 Example of stage exceedance probability . 65 5.5 Example of exceedance probability for discharge . 66 5.6 Water balance for the model with detention areas . 70 5.7 Sensitivity for hydraulic conductivity of the Surficial Aquifer System . 72 5.8 Sensitivity for Manning's number . 73 5.9 Location of stations used for comparison with other models . 74 5.10 Comparison with other models: P34 . 75 5.11 Comparison with other models: P33 . 76 5.12 Comparison with other models: NP44 . 77 5.13 Comparison with other models: NP67 . 78 x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS DA Detention Areas DERM Department of Environmental Resources Management ENP Everglades National Park ET Evapotranspiration ICU Intermediate Confining Unit Kc Crop coefficient LAI Leaf Area Index Manning's M M = (1/n): the reciprocal of Manning's n MDCSM Miami Dade County Soil Map NDA No Detention Areas NPS National Park Service NRCS U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Center Qm Miami Oolite RD Root Depth SAS Surficial Aquifer System SFWMD South Florida Water Management District (the District) SFWMM South Florida Water Management Model SSURGO Soil Survey Geographic Database STATSGO State Soil Geographic Database SZ Saturated Zone TIME Tide and Inflows in the Mangroves of the Everglades USACOE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) USGS U.S. Geological Survey UZ Unsaturated Zone xi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Everglades is the largest sub-tropical ecosystem in the United States and home to numerous unique and endangered plant and animal species. The original Everglades was a shallow wetland, where water flowed freely from Lake Okeechobee in central Florida, south through the Mangrove estuaries and Florida Bay. Beginning in the 1880s, water control structures and canals were constructed to provide land for human settlement and agriculture. These projects not only reduced the Florida Everglades by more than half, but they also created a water deficit in the dry seasons and an over abundance of water in the wet season [1].